[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Nmh-workers] Relative Message Numbers

From: Paul Fox
Subject: Re: [Nmh-workers] Relative Message Numbers
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 09:09:55 -0400

well, i haven't pushed yet, and can certainly go one more round on the
code, and the man pages, and the tests.  ;-) clearly i like it, but
clearly i'll also go with the consensus.  y'all chat about it today,

(it's true that foo=-3 isn't nearly as bad as foo#-3, which was where
we started with this syntax style.  foo##3 was a clear win in that
case, for me at any rate.  when i switched from # to =, i already
had foo==3.)


david wrote:
 > Ralph wrote:
 > > Hi Paul,
 > > 
 > > > as a convenience feature when typing negative offsets, "foo:-n" and
 > > > "foo=-n" can be entered as "foo::n" and "foo==n" respectively.
 > > 
 > > I dislike this.  Must be my preference for Python's `one way to do it'
 > > over Perl's `there must still be one more way we haven't added yet'.
 > > :-)
 > Agreed.  In general, I think it's best to minimize the
 > feature set, and therefore testing and documentation.  And
 > it helps reduce confusion between what might some day be
 > similar features given some other enhancement.  And reduce
 > the likelihood of unintended interactions between features,
 > always a concern with nmh.
 > David
 > _______________________________________________
 > Nmh-workers mailing list
 > address@hidden
 > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers

 paul fox, address@hidden (arlington, ma, where it's 51.4 degrees)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]